On Wed, 03 Oct 2018 19:01:21 +0000, David Fifield wrote: ... > And for that matter, why not a plain old HTTP CONNECT proxy?
Because the typical load balancer/forwarder would have to decide whether to forward that CONNECT or do it itself, and some other. CONNECT with a Host: header - I'm not sure there is such a thing. > That would > be even more efficient. But we're limited to what the CDN supports. Most > CDNs only support basic methods like GET and POST, not CONNECT or the > special headers needed by WebSocket. Yes. No. A quick search indicates that aws and azure are already supporting it, although I'm unable to interpret whether that is actually the respective product you are/were using. But websockets are a relevant thing unlike CONNECT, so I do expect all major players to implement that (and the components I know of (haproxy, nginx, apache, golang) are there already). - Andreas -- "Totally trivial. Famous last words." From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@*.org> Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:29:21 -0800 _______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list tor-dev@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev